When I studied Metallurgical Engineering at McGill in the 1990s, the old sexist traditions were still on their way out. Women comprised only about 20 per cent of Canadian engineering undergraduates. Our department’s broomball teams were called The Ball Crushers and The Whore Bodies. This was our level of social enlightenment.

As difficult as the study of engineering was for men, it was even more difficult for women — who not only had to solve differential equations and finish lab assignments, but had to do so in a frat-house climate. It’s like the old line about Ginger Rogers — who had to do everything Fred Astaire did, “except backwards and in heels.”

This was an era when each university faculty had its own political culture. The arts students at McGill had their left-wing Daily. The engineers published The Plumber’s Pot, which was full of sexist jokes and juvenile homophobia. And never the twain did meet.

In recent decades, male engineers have had to clean up their act. Which is a good thing. We were pigs

Thanks to social media, that sort of intra-campus political compartmentalization is impossible now. The engineers, like everyone else, have had to clean up their act. Which is a good thing. We were pigs.

Read James Damore’s now infamous manifesto, and you immediately can tell that the ex-Google engineer — who was laid off this week following outrage over his views — is a product of the modern, more progressive culture. His very first full sentence is, “I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes.” And later: “I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more.” Not exactly hate speech.

In fact, a significant portion of his manifesto consists of strategies for retaining female employees. To wit: “Women on average look for more work-life balance… Allowing and truly endorsing (as part of our culture) part time work… can keep more women in tech.” I’ve heard diversity consultants say exactly the same thing.

A significant portion of Damore's manifesto consists of strategies for retaining female employees

But Damore’s critics focus instead on his thoughtcrime, which was to suggest that “differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership.” Many scientists — including Canada’s own Debra Soh, who holds a PhD in sexual neuroscience — will attest to the truth of this. Still, as the popular kids all know, you’re not supposed to actually go out and say it.

I’m no neuroscientist. Unlike Soh, I’ve never studied human brain scans. But over careers in engineering, law and journalism, I’ve met plenty of smart people. And I’ve observed a lot of anecdotal evidence that suggests men and women have — on the level of population means — subtly different intellectual and behavioural strengths. Which in turn encourages some of them to pick one field over another.

In law, I found that, on average, the men I worked with were more aggressive litigators, and the women were more meticulous dealmakers. In science, I found that men were more likely than women to scamper down niche mathematical rabbit holes. There are exceptions, of course — such as Marie Henein, who became a nationally known lawyer for her representation of Jian Ghomeshi. And I’ll repeat my caveat that I’m no Deborah Soh. I can only report what I’ve seen and experienced.

Many scientists will attest to biological differences. Damore's crime was to go out and say it

Reasonable people can debate the extent to which sex differences are a product of nature versus nurture. But I find it alarming that the party-line approach is to suppress the debate entirely. Certainly, that seems to be Google’s policy. This week, the chief executive of Google’s parent company, Sundar Pichai, fired Damore after declaring his views to be “not okay.”

As a former engineer, I recognize myself in Damore’s manifesto — not just his style of argument, but also his somewhat cranky, politically tone-deaf appeal to evolutionary psychology and statistical analysis. The man is a prisoner of his trade. Engineers are trained to look at the data. To isolate variables. To separate signal from noise. To see human nature in terms of free-body diagrams, flowcharts and stoichiometric calculations. To an engineer, the laws governing math, physics, biology and culture have no moral dimension.

It’s a perspective that has gotten me into trouble over my career. Science is often not politically correct. But once you learn this way of viewing the world, it cannot be unlearned.

The manifesto’s author is a man who is at war with himself. He knows that his life would be simpler, his career path smoother, if he followed his colleagues’ lead by flying the diversity flag and keeping his head down. But he refuses to sign on to politically fashionable concepts that he believes are inconsistent with the evidence-based science that Google applies in all other areas of its operations.

Some might say he stuck to his principles. Which, last time I checked, was a good thing.

***

I’m still in touch with many of my engineering classmates from the 1990s. We’re in our 40s now. Some of us started companies, or became managers, or went into unrelated fields. The only classmate I know who still loves working every day as a metallurgical scientist happens to be a woman. She works for a multinational company that makes airplane engines.

My friend also happens to be a polymath who loves music, the performing arts, board games, and history, and has found ways to incorporate all of these into her intellectual life. Which should not be surprising, since — as any Silicon Valley recruiter can tell you — the most successful engineers usually have hyperactive brains and all sorts of esoteric interests outside of their main field. This quality allows these workers to come at problems from different vantage points, and to find alternative routes to bonding intellectually with his or her colleagues — a necessity for collaboration.

From what I can tell, there is no difference between men and women on the important measures

The good news is that, from what I can tell, there is no difference between men and women on this measure. But I don’t think the same is true of what fields attract gifted men and women (on average). About three-fifths of Canadian undergrads are now female. Canadian medical schools are now majority female, as are law schools. Yet the percentage of women in Canadian engineering schools still stands at about 20 per cent — exactly where it stood in my day — despite aggressive efforts during this period to attract women into STEM.

Is it really so crazy to think — as Damore and Soh believe — that there is some genetic factor at play here? And even if they’re right, is it such a disaster that smart women are becoming ophthalmologists and anti-trust attorneys instead of writing apps and playing foosball in Mountain View?

Or is this week’s Google drama simply a case of human-resource management by social panic — with management using a politically unfashionable nerd as whipping boy to prove their progressive bona fides?

Almost Done!

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.